•  
  •  
 

Abstract

This article examines the deployment of Artificial Intelligence (“AI”) by Indian Central and State Governments across key public sectors, namely, healthcare, law enforcement, justice, welfare delivery, and urban governance. AI applications in these domains promise enhanced efficiency and service delivery but also introduce risks such as algorithmic and automation biases, inaccuracies, and accountability gaps. The absence of a comprehensive regulatory framework in India exacerbates these issues, leaving citizens vulnerable to opaque decision-making processes. We discuss the current fragmented regulatory landscape in India and compare it with AI governance models in the European Union, United States, and China. Building on this analysis, the article explores critical questions: Are broad ethical principles sufficient to regulate AI? Should India adopt a horizontal (cross-sector) or sector-specific regulatory approach? And most importantly, who should be held liable when government-deployed AI systems cause harm? We argue that a hybrid regulatory model combining broad horizontal principles with sector-specific rules offers the most context-sensitive and effective pathway forward. Additionally, we propose that the liability framework in India must move beyond traditional fault-based models to embrace absolute and vicarious liability – particularly for state-led AI deployment. This dual approach, i.e., ex-ante regulation and ex-post accountability can help India build an AI governance architecture that is rights-respecting, transparent, and resilient. As AI continues to shape critical public functions in India, the urgency of establishing a robust regulatory and liability framework cannot be overstated. A rights-centric, hybrid regulatory model, paired with a clear and enforceable liability regime is essential to safeguard democratic values, ensure state accountability, and protect citizens from technological harm. This paper underscores the need for India to move beyond aspirational principles and fragmented guidelines toward a comprehensive legal framework that balances innovation with constitutional responsibility.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.55496/XXVR5911

Download

Share

COinS